From e6218764534c18cf041b54055ddc539d1ef6c799 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Zach <yamkoo@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:37:55 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] Replaced LINQ query with for loop.

Upon reflection, the query looked nice, but was inferior to a plain for loop because it would have to create n anonymous objects to process the list, even with LINQ's filtering optimization, due to select preceding where.
---
 .../tools/Watch/WatchList/WatchList.cs              | 13 ++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/BizHawk.Client.Common/tools/Watch/WatchList/WatchList.cs b/BizHawk.Client.Common/tools/Watch/WatchList/WatchList.cs
index f259f95784..0c8b93793c 100644
--- a/BizHawk.Client.Common/tools/Watch/WatchList/WatchList.cs
+++ b/BizHawk.Client.Common/tools/Watch/WatchList/WatchList.cs
@@ -231,11 +231,14 @@ namespace BizHawk.Client.Common
 		/// <param name="reverse">Defines the order of the sort. Ascending (true) or descending (false)</param>
 		public void OrderWatches(string column, bool reverse)
 		{
-			var separatorIndices = _watchList.Select((w, i) => new { watch = w, index = i })
-							 .Where(w => w.watch.IsSeparator)
-							 .Select(w => w.index)
-							 .ToList();
-
+			var separatorIndices = new List<int>();
+			for (var i = 0; i < _watchList.Count; i++)
+			{
+				if (_watchList[i].IsSeparator)
+				{
+					separatorIndices.Add(i);
+				}
+			}
 			separatorIndices.Add(_watchList.Count);
 
 			// Sort "blocks" of addresses between separators.